Nexway SAS and Nexway Inc. Settle Charges Over Payment Processing Role in Tech Support Scam Networks

Nexway SAS, a French payment processing company, and its U.S. affiliate Nexway Inc. agreed to settle federal charges related to their provision of payment processing services to tech support scam operations that collectively defrauded hundreds of thousands of consumers across the United States and internationally.DOCUMENTED The settlement addressed allegations that Nexway processed payments for clients it knew or should have known were operating deceptive tech support schemes — operations that used fake computer error alerts, deceptive telephone calls, and high-pressure sales tactics to convince consumers their devices were infected or compromised and then charged fees for unnecessary or fictitious repair services.

Tech support scams are among the most widely reported consumer fraud categories, disproportionately affecting older adults and people less familiar with computer security who are more likely to accept at face value a message stating that their device has a serious problem and that immediate action, including payment for remote repair services, is required.DOCUMENTED Payment processors that knowingly or recklessly process payments for these operations are a critical element of the fraud infrastructure, and enforcement actions against processors have become a significant component of regulatory strategy in this space.

The Payment Processor's Role in Enabling Fraud

Payment processors occupy a gatekeeper position in the fraud ecosystem: without access to card payment processing infrastructure, most consumer-facing scam operations cannot collect money from victims at scale.DOCUMENTED This gatekeeper role creates both a vulnerability — fraudulent operations that successfully obtain a payment processor can reach many victims quickly — and an enforcement opportunity, since cutting off a processor from scam clients can disrupt multiple fraud schemes simultaneously.

The federal complaint against Nexway alleged that the company had access to information that should have indicated its tech support clients were operating deceptively — including elevated chargeback rates, consumer complaints routed through the payment network, and the nature of the services being sold — but continued to process payments for these clients rather than taking timely action to terminate the relationships.REVIEWED

Warning Signs in High-Risk Merchant Portfolios

Payment processors working with high-risk merchant categories — which include tech support, online pharmacies, and subscription products — are expected by card networks and federal regulators to maintain enhanced monitoring for fraud indicators and to act on warning signs rather than waiting for them to reach a threshold that is impossible to ignore.DOCUMENTED The specific indicators most associated with tech support scam operations include chargeback rates substantially above industry norms, consumer complaint patterns describing deceptive alerts or high-pressure telephone pitches, and transactions with refund ratios inconsistent with legitimate software or service businesses.

The Nexway case, along with a series of related processor enforcement actions, established the principle that a processor's awareness of elevated chargebacks or complaints associated with a merchant is itself an obligation-triggering event — requiring investigation and, if the investigation confirms fraud, termination of the processing relationship.REVIEWED

Settlement Terms and Compliance Requirements

The Nexway settlement required the company to implement a comprehensive merchant onboarding due diligence program for high-risk clients, including pre-approval screening, ongoing monitoring for fraud indicators, and defined thresholds for merchant suspension or termination.DOCUMENTED The required program specified the types of documentation Nexway must collect from high-risk merchants before approving them for processing services and the ongoing indicators that must trigger investigation and potential relationship termination.

A financial component of the settlement provided funds for refunds to consumers who had been charged by tech support scam operations processed through Nexway's network. Given the international scope of the affected operations and the challenge of identifying individual victims of tech support fraud across multiple schemes, consumer refund distribution in cases of this type is administered through a claims process.DOCUMENTED

Protecting Yourself From Tech Support Scams

Tech support scams rely on the urgency and fear created by messages — pop-ups, voice calls, or browser alerts — claiming that a device has been infected, compromised, or is in immediate danger. Legitimate computer security software does not require an immediate call to a toll-free number displayed in a pop-up, and major technology companies do not make unsolicited calls to consumers about detected problems on their devices.REVIEWED

Any consumer who encounters a pop-up or receives a call claiming their device has been compromised and that they must pay immediately for repair services should close the browser window or hang up without providing payment information, credit card numbers, or remote access to the device. If a message prevents normal browser closing, restarting the device will clear it. Consumers who have already provided payment or remote access in response to such a message should contact their financial institution immediately and report the incident to their state attorney general and to the relevant federal reporting system.

The Carrier Responsibility Framework and Future Enforcement

The Nexway settlement is part of a broader regulatory project of holding payment processors and infrastructure providers accountable for the downstream uses of their services when warning signs of fraud are available and ignored. This framework parallels the VoIP carrier responsibility doctrine being developed simultaneously by the FTC and FCC in the robocall context — in both areas, the principle is that infrastructure providers who receive actionable notice of fraud being conducted through their platforms bear an obligation to investigate and act, not merely to disclaim responsibility by characterizing themselves as neutral technology intermediaries. Companies in the payment processing, VoIP, and online advertising infrastructure sectors should treat these enforcement trends as a signal that regulators view the infrastructure layer as a critical point of intervention in fraud ecosystems and will pursue accountability at that layer when the record shows knowledge and inaction.

Have documents relevant to this story? Reach us through our tips channel.